Utah Closed One Data-Center Subsidy Door and Left Two Large Openings Beside It.

How much public support can still reach a data center after Utah says subsidies are limited?

Beginning May 6, 2027, House Bill 507 generally bars political subdivisions from using tax increment or personal-property-tax funding to support large-load data centers.

Picture two cities competing for the same server campus by offering future property-tax growth or relief from personal-property taxes. HB507 removes that ordinary local bidding tool. A city cannot simply promise away the covered revenue to make its site cheaper than the neighboring city.

That is a meaningful corporate-welfare limit. It recognizes that a project with enormous electricity demand and capital equipment should not automatically receive public financing because its investment number is large.

Then the exceptions begin.

Projects inside a regionally significant development zone may still receive support. A regional authority may use zone funds or as much as 60 percent of the project area's property-tax increment. Counties and municipalities may also provide up to 80 percent of specified energy-tax revenue.

Picture the same project moving inside a state-coordinated zone. Public support can return through a regional authority, and most of the specified energy-tax revenue can still be committed. The decision moves into a named channel with percentages large enough to finance roads, power connections, site work, or other project costs.

The law also leaves the existing sales-tax exemption untouched. Residents therefore need one combined statement showing every state, regional, local, utility, and tax benefit attached to the facility. Reading HB507's prohibition alone will not reveal the full public contribution.

For a large project, those percentages can move substantial public money. The law narrows the ordinary route and channels support through named alternatives.

House Bill 76 applies to qualifying large data centers that begin operating on or after July 1, 2026. Before construction, operators must disclose expected water use and provide withdrawal and discharge information. Annual reports cover actual withdrawals, conservation, and environmental protections.

The threshold covers facilities of at least 10,000 square feet that withdraw at least 75 acre-feet of water a year. Before construction, the water provider and community can compare projected demand with available supply. After operation begins, annual figures show whether the facility used what it predicted.

Picture residents watching reservoir levels fall while a new data center comes online nearby. Facility-level reporting lets them connect one project's withdrawals to the local water discussion. A statewide total would hide that relationship by mixing water-rich and water-scarce areas together.

Utah must publish withdrawals by facility instead of blending them into a statewide number. Residents can see the demand attached to the project near them. Existing facilities do not enter the full new reporting system.

The law requires disclosure and a penalty for failing to report. It does not cap water use or guarantee that a project will be denied when supply is tight. The public record supplies the evidence for future water decisions, which makes accurate measurement, corrections, and enforcement essential.

Utah made new water demand easier to see and reduced one subsidy route. The remaining exceptions can still carry a large share of project-area taxes.

Utah should show residents exactly how much public money each data center receives and how much local water it uses.

This is our read of the laws. We encourage you to read them yourself and reach your own conclusions.